DxOMark review for the Hasseblad H3DII 50

Dxomark.com adds the Hasseblad H3DII 50 to its database, and its results coincide with those of the previously-analyzed H3DII 39. With a global DxOMark score of 78.2, the H3DII 50 ranks number 8, very close to the H3DII 39, which achieved a score of 75.3.

Comparing the H3DII 50 to the new Phase One P65+ back (with its 60.5 Mpix sensor) is problematic for Hasselblad, however, in that the P65+ takes the lead in every aspect, per the table following:

Camera Model

Sensor Size

Color Depth

Dynamic Range

Low-Light ISO

Hasselblad H3DII

51.7 Mpix

24.7

12.7

574

Phase One P65+

60.5 Mpix

26.0

13.0

1158

Key sensor characteristics

The Hasselblad H3DII-50 sensor features a very high resolution medium-format CCD with 51.7 Mpix manufactured by Kodak; a 16-bit Analog/Digital (A/D) converter; and an ISO range of 50 to 400.

Key performance factors

With respect to ISO sensitivity, the only real ISO provided is ISO 50 (measured sensitivity is 45). All other ISO values are obtained by applying a digital gain during the RAW-to-JPEG conversion, which is the same type of design as for the H3DII 39.

Overall, the Hasselblad H3DII-50’s RAW image quality performance is pretty good. But the launch of the Phase One P65+ has clearly revived competition. But given their respective launch dates (2007-11-26 for the H3DII 50 and 2008-07-14 for the P65+), comparing these two models is arguably a bit unfair to Hasselblad

Disclaimer: This dxomark review evaluates only the selected camera’s RAW sensor performance metrics (i.e., Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Low-Light ISO), and should not be construed as a review of the camera’s overall performance, as it does not address such other important criteria as image signal processing, mechanical robustness, ease of use, flexibility, optics, value for money, etc. While RAW sensor performance is critically important, it is not the only factor that should be taken into consideration when choosing a digital camera.

Further readings for the DxOMark review for the Hasseblad H3DII 50

To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.

Comments

Hasselblad dynamic range

Interesting that the Hasselbald's dynamic range is worse than the one of the Nikon D800. Just yesterday I watched a video on youtube where someone compared both cameras and found that Hasselblad's dynamic rage is unbeatable.

First replies for this comment

Re: Hasselblad dynamic range

Dynamic range is determined by the read noise and saturation capacity. The Hasselblad is very likely to have a high saturation capacity, that's why their highlights are less likely to be blown out, but you couldn't get much information from the shadows. If you underexposed the D800 and brighten it up in post, it is very likely to have more dynamic range than if you did the same to Hasselblad.

Re: Hasselblad dynamic range

Quote:

The Hasselblad is very likely to have a high saturation capacity, that's why their highlights are less likely to be blown out, but you couldn't get much information from the shadows.

Actually the Hasselblad H3DII_50 doesn't really have an unusually high "full well" or saturation capacity. It is, for example, lower than a camera with a similar pixel size that was also released in 2007: the Canon 1Ds Mark III (see http://www.sensorgen.info/). The Hasselblad also has more background noise, and a lower quantum efficiency. All-in-all the medium format sensors consistently under-perform in terms of dynamic range (especially considering that they should be able to outperform smaller sensors).

The rest of your analysis sounds sensible to me: it is easy to avoid blown highlights (for any saturation capacity) by appropriately (under)exposing. But that brings you uncomfortably close to the noise floor for scenes with dark shadows. I find it harder to judge whether or when people should care about this.